Scan barcode
A review by shandyt
Old Man's War by John Scalzi
4.0
4.25 stars.
A+ for concept, B- for execution. The plot is less of a "story" than a vehicle for the idea: what if, after a lifetime of experience, we got to start over, better? Almost every other aspect of the book is in service to that core what-if scenario, and the book suffers for it. For example, the characters feel same-y in their dialogue, and their backgrounds don't seem to have much of an effect on their abilities or their military careers. I have to squint my eyes at the main character's incredible luck, which seems to be an excuse for him to rapidly gain ranks for... you know, I'm not actually sure why. It feels like there was a great opportunity here to delve more into his character that was completely passed over.
This book is good for what it is, which is short novel-length science fiction. But the more I read, the more I find that I appreciate what I'm sure most people view as "unnecessary" detail. I want to get into the nitty gritty of the world and its setting, plus the characters and their motivations, and sometimes it seems like sci-fi just isn't the genre for that. Most of the sci-fi I've read is so much less character-focused than plot and tech-focused. And perhaps that's no fault of the genre, but my expectations. I've gotten so used to character-driven fantasy stories that this book (and my previous read, A Wizard of Earthsea) felt a bit perfunctory by comparison. In particular, the last act of OMW felt like a race to the finish, and I was surprised when things started winding down and I looked to see only 46 seconds of audiobook left. Overall, very cool concept, but I would have liked it better if it were twice as long.
A+ for concept, B- for execution. The plot is less of a "story" than a vehicle for the idea: what if, after a lifetime of experience, we got to start over, better? Almost every other aspect of the book is in service to that core what-if scenario, and the book suffers for it. For example, the characters feel same-y in their dialogue, and their backgrounds don't seem to have much of an effect on their abilities or their military careers. I have to squint my eyes at the main character's incredible luck, which seems to be an excuse for him to rapidly gain ranks for... you know, I'm not actually sure why.
Spoiler
Take, as a few examples, the Master Sergeant telling John's cohort that he will find some way to hate each of them, nor will he grow fonder of them over time. Cue John somehow proving him wrong on both counts. Or that John independently realized you could use the BrainPals to allow your squad to maintain contact during the training exercise. Or the idea that he just happened to be the first person to realize you had to double-tap the Consu. Or being so incredibly dedicated to his lady love that he happened to find the Consu device in the infirmary, and grabbed the manual. His deeds get more suspicious as they start to pile up. And how is any of this based on who John is as a person, as opposed to any other John Q. Protagonist? How does his background as a copywriter give him insight into how to run a squad? Or fight aliens?This book is good for what it is, which is short novel-length science fiction. But the more I read, the more I find that I appreciate what I'm sure most people view as "unnecessary" detail. I want to get into the nitty gritty of the world and its setting, plus the characters and their motivations, and sometimes it seems like sci-fi just isn't the genre for that. Most of the sci-fi I've read is so much less character-focused than plot and tech-focused. And perhaps that's no fault of the genre, but my expectations. I've gotten so used to character-driven fantasy stories that this book (and my previous read, A Wizard of Earthsea) felt a bit perfunctory by comparison. In particular, the last act of OMW felt like a race to the finish, and I was surprised when things started winding down and I looked to see only 46 seconds of audiobook left. Overall, very cool concept, but I would have liked it better if it were twice as long.